On the Ten638638 The number
“ten” is confirmed by Theodoret, who quotes the article on
Christ’s “Birth of the Virgin” as from Cyril’s
fourth Catechetical Lecture “On the ten Doctrines.”
The mss. vary between “ten” and
“eleven,” and differ also in the special titles and
numeration of the separate Articles.
Points of Doctrine.

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and
vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the
world, &c.

1. Vice mimics
virtue, and the tares strive to be thought wheat, growing like the
wheat in appearance, but being detected by good judges from the
taste. The devil also transfigures himself into an angel of
light6396392 Cor. xi. 14.; not that he may
reascend to where he was, for having made his heart hard as an
anvil640640Job xli. 24, Sept.;
xli.
15: ἡ καρδία
αὐτοῦ…ἕστηκεν
ὥσπερ ἄκμων
ἀνήλατος. These
statements concerning the Devil seem to be directed against
Origen’s opinion (De Principiis I. 2), that the Angels
“who have been removed from their primal state of blessedness
have not been removed irrecoverably.” The question is
discussed, and the opinions of several Fathers quoted, by Huet,
Origeniana, II. c. 25., he has henceforth a
will that cannot repent; but in order that he may envelope those who
are living an Angelic life in a mist of blindness, and a pestilent
condition of unbelief. Many wolves are going about in
sheeps’ clothing641641Matt. vii. 15. The same text is applied to
Heretics by Ignatius, Philadelph. ii. and by Irenæus, L. I.
c. i. § 2., their clothing being
that of sheep, not so their claws and teeth: but clad in their
soft skin, and deceiving the innocent by their appearance, they shed
upon them from their fangs the destructive poison of ungodliness.
We have need therefore of divine grace, and of a sober mind, and of
eyes that see, lest from eating tares as wheat we suffer harm from
ignorance, and lest from taking the wolf to be a sheep we become his
prey, and from supposing the destroying Devil to be a beneficent Angel
we be devoured: for, as the Scripture saith, he goeth about as
a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour6426421 Pet. v. 8.. This is the cause of the
Church’s admonitions, the cause of the present instructions, and
of the lessons which are read.

2. For the method of godliness consists of
these two things, pious doctrines, and virtuous practice: and
neither are the doctrines acceptable to God apart from good works, nor
does God accept the works which are not perfected with pious
doctrines. For what profit is it, to know well the doctrines
concerning God, and yet to be a vile fornicator? And again, what
profit is it, to be nobly temperate, and an impious blasphemer? A
most precious possession therefore is the knowledge of doctrines:
also there is need of a wakeful soul, since there are many that make
spoil through philosophy and vain deceit643643Col. ii. 8.. The Greeks on the one hand draw men
away by their smooth tongue, for honey droppeth from a
harlot’s lips644644Prov. v. 3.: whereas they
of the Circumcision deceive those who come to them by means of the
Divine Scriptures, which they miserably misinterpret though studying
them from childhood to old age645645Is. xlvi. 3. Sept. παιδευόμενοι
ἐκ παιδίου
ἕως γήρως., and growing old
in ignorance. But the children of heretics, by their good
words and smooth tongue, deceive the hearts of the
innocent646646Rom. xvi. 17. Cyril has εὐγλωττίας
in place of εὐλογίας., disguising with the
name of Christ as it were with honey the poisoned arrows647647 Compare Ignatius,
Trall. vi. of their impious doctrines: concerning
all of whom together the Lord saith, Take heed lest any man mislead
you648648Matt. xxiv. 4.. This is the reason for the teaching of
the Creed and for expositions upon it.

3. But before delivering you over to the
Creed649649 Compare Rom. vi. 17: “that form of
teaching whereunto ye were delivered.” The instruction
of Catechumens in the Articles of the Faith was commonly called the
“Traditio Symboli,” or “Delivery of the
Creed.”, I think it is well to make use at present of
a short summary of necessary doctrines; that the multitude of things to
be spoken, and the long interval of the days of all this holy Lent, may
not cause forgetfulness in the mind of the more simple among you; but
that, having strewn some seeds now in a summary way, we may not forget
the same when afterwards more widely tilled. But let those here
present whose habit of mind is mature, and 20who have their senses already
exercised to discern good and evil650650Heb. v. 14.,
endure patiently to listen to things fitted rather for children, and to
an introductory course, as it were, of milk: that at the same
time both those who have need of the instruction may be benefited, and
those who have the knowledge may rekindle the remembrance of things
which they already know.

I. Of God.

4. First then let there be laid as a
foundation in your soul the doctrine concerning God; that God is One,
alone unbegotten, without beginning, change, or variation651651 Compare Hermas,
Mandat. I. Athan. Epist. de Decretis Nic. Syn.
xxii.: οὕτω
καὶ τὸ
ἄτρεπτον καὶ
ἀναλλοίωτον
αὐτὸν εἶναι
σωθήσεται.
So Aristotle (Metaphys. XI. c. iv. 13) describes the First Cause
as ἀπαθὲς καὶ
ἀναλλοίωτον.; neither begotten of another, nor having
another to succeed Him in His life; who neither began to live in time,
nor endeth ever: and that He is both good and just; that if ever
thou hear a heretic say, that there is one God who is just, and another
who is good652652 Irenæus, I.
c. xxvii. says that Cerdo taught that the God of the Law and the
Prophets was not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: for that He
is known, but the other unknown, and the one is just, but the other
good. Also III. c. 25, § 3: “Marcion himself,
therefore, by dividing God into two, and calling the one good, and the
other judicial, on both sides puts an end to Deity.”
Compare Tertullian, c. Marcion. I. 2, and 6; Origen,
c. Cels. iv. 54., thou mayest
immediately remember, and discern the poisoned arrow of heresy.
For some have impiously dared to divide the One God in their
teaching: and some have said that one is the Creator and Lord of
the soul, and another of the body653653 This tenet was
held by the Manichæans and other heretics, and is traced back to
the Apostolic age by Bishop Pearson (Exposition of the Creed,
Art. i. p. 79, note c). Compare Athanasius c.Apollinarium, I. 21; II. 8; c.Gentes, § 6; de Incarnatione, § 2, in
this series, and Augustine (c. Faustum, xx. 15,
21, and xxi. 4).; a doctrine at
once absurd and impious. For how can a man become the one servant
of two masters, when our Lord says in the Gospels, No man can serve
two masters654654Matt. vi. 24; Luke xvi. 13.? There is then
One Only God, the Maker both of souls and bodies: One the Creator
of heaven and earth, the Maker of Angels and Archangels: of many
the Creator, but of One only the Father before all ages,—of One
only, His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom He made
all things visible and invisible655655John i. 3; Col. i. 16..

5. This Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is
not circumscribed in any place656656 S. Aug. in
Ps. lxxv. 6: Si in aliquo loco esset, non esset
Deus. Sermo 342: Deus habitando continet non
continetur. Origen, c. Cels.
vii. 34: “God is of too excellent a nature for any
place: He holds all things in His power, and is Himself not
confined by anything whatever.” Compare the quotation from
Sir Isaac Newton’s Principia, in the note on Cat. vi.
8., nor is He less than
the heaven; but the heavens are the works of His
fingers657657Ps. viii. 3., and the whole
earth is held in His grasp658658Is. xl. 12.: He is in all
things and around all. Think not that the sun is brighter than
He659659 See Cat. xv. 3, and note
there., or equal to Him: for He who at first
formed the sun must needs be incomparably greater and brighter.
He foreknoweth the things that shall be, and is mightier than all,
knowing all things and doing as He will; not being subject to any
necessary sequence of events, nor to nativity, nor chance, nor fate; in
all things perfect, and equally possessing every absolute form660660ἰδέαν. Cyril uses the word in
the Platonic sense, as in the next sentence he adopts the formula,
which Plato commonly uses in describing the “idea:”
ἀεὶ κατὰ τὰ
αὐτὰ καὶ
ὡσαύτως
ἔχειν. Phaed. 78 c. of virtue, neither diminishing nor
increasing, but in mode and conditions ever the same; who hath prepared
punishment for sinners, and a crown for the righteous.

6. Seeing then that many have gone astray in
divers ways from the One God, some having deified the sun, that when
the sun sets they may abide in the night season without God; others the
moon, to have no God by day661661Job xxxi. 26, 27. The worship of Sun and Moon under
various names was almost universal.; others the other
parts of the world662662 Gaea or Tellus, the
earth; Zeus or Jupiter, the sky; rivers, fountains, &c.; others the
arts663663 Music, Medicine,
Hunting, War, Agriculture, Metallurgy, &c., represented by Apollo,
Æsculapius, Diana, Mars, Ceres, Vulcan.; others their various kinds of food664664 Herodotus, Book II.,
describes the Egyptian worship of various birds, fishes, and
quadrupeds. Leeks and onions also were held sacred: Porrum
et caepe nefas violare, Juv. Sat. xv. 9. Compare
Clement of Alexandria, Protrept. c. ii. § 39,
Klotz.; others their pleasures665665 Eros, Dionysus.;
while some, mad after women, have set up on high an image of a naked
woman, and called it Aphrodite666666 Clement of Alexandria
(Protrept. c. iv. § 53, Klotz) states that the
courtesan Phryne was taken as a model for Aphrodite.
“Praxiteles when fashioning the statue of Aphrodite of Cnidus
made it like the form of Cratine his paramour.”
Ibid., and worshipped their
own lust in a visible form; and others dazzled by the brightness of
gold have deified it667667 Plutus. and the other kinds
of matter;—whereas if one lay as a first foundation in his heart
the doctrine of the unity668668τῆς
μοναρχίας
τοῦ θεοῦ. See note on
the title of Cat. VI. Praxeas made use of the term
“Monarchy” to exclude the Son (and the Spirit) from the
Godhead. Tertullian in his treatise against Praxeas maintains the
true doctrine that the Son is no obstacle to the
“Monarchy,” because He is of the substance of the Father,
does nothing without the Father’s will, and has received all
power from the Father, to Whom He will in the end deliver up the
kingdom. In this sense Dionysius, Bishop of Rome, speaks of the
Divine Monarchy as “that most sacred doctrine of the Church of
God.” Compare Athanas. de Decretis, Nic. Syn. c. vi.
§ 3 and Dr. Newman’s note. In Orat. iv.
c. Arian. p 606 (617), Athanasius derives the term
from ἀρχή, in the sense of
“beginning:” οὕτως μία
ἀρχὴ
θεότητος καὶ
οὐ δύο ἀρχαί,
ὅθεν κυρίως
καὶ μοναρχία
ἐστίν. See the full discussion
of Monarchianism in Athanasius, p. xxiii. ff. in this series,
and Newman’s Introduction to Athan. Or. iv. of God, and trust to
Him, he roots out at once the whole crop669669 For φοράν (Bened.) many
mss. read φθοράν,
“corruption.” of
the evils of idolatry, and of the error of the heretics: lay
thou, therefore, this first doctrine of religion as a foundation in thy
soul by faith.

Of Christ.

7. Believe also in the Son of God, One and Only,
our Lord Jesus Christ, Who was be21gotten God of God, begotten Life of Life,
begotten Light of Light670670 Compare xi. 4, 9,
18., Who is in all things
like671671Τὸν ὅμοιον
κατὰ πάντα τῷ
γεννησαντι.
On the meaning and history of this phrase, proposed by the Semi-Arians
at the Council of Ariminum as a substitute for ὁμοούσιον, see
Athan. de Syn. § 8, sqq. to Him that begat, Who received not His being
in time, but was before all ages eternally and incomprehensibly
begotten of the Father: The Wisdom and the Power of God, and His
Righteousness personally subsisting672672ἐνυπόστατος.
Cf. xi. 10; Athan. c. Apollinar. I. 20, 21.: Who
sitteth on the right hand of the Father before all ages.

For the throne at God’s right hand He
received not, as some have thought, because of His patient endurance,
being crowned as it were by God after His Passion; but throughout His
being,—a being by eternal generation673673 The mss. vary much, but I have followed the Benedictine
text.,—He holds His royal dignity, and shares
the Father’s seat, being God and Wisdom and Power, as hath been
said; reigning together with the Father, and creating all things for
the Father, yet lacking nothing in the dignity of Godhead, and knowing
Him that hath begotten Him, even as He is known of Him that hath
begotten; and to speak briefly, remember thou what is written in the
Gospels, that none knoweth the Son but the Father, neither knoweth
any the Father save the Son674674Matt. xi. 27; John x. 15; xvii.
25..

8. Further, do thou neither
separate675675 This was a point
earnestly maintained by the orthodox Bishops at Nicæa, that the
Son begotten of the substance of the Father is ever inseparably in the
Father. Athan. de Decretis Syn. c. 20 ; Tertullian
c. Marc. IV. c. 6. Cf. Ignat. ad Trall. vi.
(Long Recension): τὸν
μὲν γὰρ
Χριστὸν
ἀλλοτριουσι
τοῦ Πατρός. the Son from the
Father, nor by making a confusion believe in a Son-Fatherhood676676υἱοπατορία.
A term of derision applied to the doctrine of Sabellius. Compare
Athanas. Expositio Fidei, c. 2: “neither do we
imagine a Son-Father, as the Sabellians.” See Index,
Υιοπάτωρ.; but believe that of One God there is One
Only-begotten Son, who is before all ages God the Word; not the
uttered677677Λόγος
προφορικός, the term used by Paul of Samosata, implied that the Word was
impersonal, being conceived as a particular activity of God. See
Dorner, Person of Christ, Div. I. vol. ii. p. 436 (English
Tr.): and compare Athanasius, Expositio Fidei, c.
1; υἱὸν ἐκ
τοῦ Πατρὸς
ἀνάρχως καὶ
ἀϊδίως
γεγεννημένον,
λόγον δὲ οὐ
προφορικόν,
οὐκ
ἐνδιάθετον.
Cardinal Newman (Athan. c. Arianos, I. 7, note) observes that
some Christian writers of the 2nd Century “seem to speak of the
Divine generation as taking place immediately before the creation of
the world, that is, as if not eternal, though at the same time they
teach that our Lord existed before that generation. In other
words they seem to teach that He was the Word from eternity, and became
the Son at the beginning of all things; some of them expressly
considering Him, first as the λόγος
ἐνδιάθετος,
or Reason, in the Father, or (as may be speciously represented) a mere
attribute; next, as the λόγος
προφορικός,
or Word.” The terms λόγος
ἐνδιάθετος,
or ‘word conceived in the mind,’ and λόγος
προφορικός,
or ‘word expressed’ (emissum, or prolalivum),
were in use among the Gnostics (Iren. II. c. 12, §
5). As applied to the Son both terms, though sometimes used in a
right sense, were condemned as inadequate. Compare xi. 10. word diffused into the air, nor to be likened
to impersonal words678678ἀνυποστάτοις
λόγοις. Athan. c.
Arianos Orat. iv. c. 8: πάλιν οἱ
λέγοντες
μόνον ὄνομα
εἶναι υἱοῦ,
ἀνούσιον δὲ
καὶ
ἀνυπόστατον
εἶναι τὸν
υἱὸν τοῦ
Θεοῦ, κ.τ.λ.; but the Word the
Son, Maker of all who partake of reason, the Word who heareth the
Father, and Himself speaketh. And on these points, should God
permit, we will speak more at large in due season; for we do not forget
our present purpose to give a summary introduction to the
Faith.

Concerning His Birth of the
Virgin.

9. Believe then that this Only-begotten Son
of God for our sins came down from heaven upon earth, and took upon Him
this human nature of like passions679679ὁμοιοπαθῆ.
Compare Acts xiv. 15; Jas. v.
17. with us, and was
begotten of the Holy Virgin and of the Holy Ghost, and was made Man,
not in seeming and mere show680680 On the origin of the
Docetic heresy, see vi. 14., but in truth; nor
yet by passing through the Virgin as through a channel681681 Valentinus the Gnostic
taught that God produced a Son of an animal nature who “passed
through Mary just as water through a tube, and that on him the Saviour
descended at his Baptism.” Irenæus, I. vii. 2.; but was of her made truly flesh, [and truly
nourished with milk682682 The words which the
Benedictine Editor introduces in the brackets are found in Theodoret,
and adopted by recent Editors, with Codd. M.A.], and did truly eat
as we do, and truly drink as we do. For if the Incarnation was a
phantom, salvation is a phantom also. The Christ was of two
natures, Man in what was seen, but God in what was not seen; as Man
truly eating like us, for He had the like feeling of the flesh with us;
but as God feeding the five thousand from five loaves; as Man truly
dying, but as God raising him that had been dead four days; truly
sleeping in the ship as Man, and walking upon the waters as
God.

Of the Cross.

10. He was truly crucified for our
sins. For if thou wouldest deny it, the place refutes thee
visibly, this blessed Golgotha683683 Eusebius, Life
of Constantine, iii. 28., in which we are now
assembled for the sake of Him who was here crucified; and the whole
world has since been filled with pieces of the wood of the
Cross684684 The discovery of
the “True Cross” is related with many marvellous
particulars by Socrates, Eccles. Hist. i. 17; and Sozomen, E.
H. ii. 1. A portion was said to have been left by Helena at
Jerusalem, enclosed in a silver case; and another portion sent to
Constantinople, where Constantine privately enclosed it in his own
statue, to be a safeguard to the city. Eusebius, Life of
Constantine, iii. 25–30 , gives a long account of the
discovery of the Holy Sepulchre, but makes no mention of the
Cross. Cyril seems to have been the first to record it, 25 years
after. Cf. Greg. Nyss. Bapt. Christi (p. 519).. But He was crucified not for sins of
His own, but that we might be delivered from our sins. And
though as Man He was at that time despised of men, and was
buffeted, yet He was acknowledged by the Creation as God: for
when the sun saw his Lord dishonoured, he grew dim and trembled, not
enduring the sight.

11. He was truly laid as Man in a tomb of
rock; but rocks were rent asunder by terror because of Him. He
went down into the regions beneath the earth, that thence also He might
redeem the righteous685685 Compare xiv. 18, 19, on
the Descent into Hades.. For, tell me,
couldst thou wish the living only to enjoy His grace, and that, though
most of them are unholy; and not wish those who from Adam had for a
long while been imprisoned to have now gained their liberty?
Esaias the Prophet proclaimed with loud voice so many things concerning
Him; wouldst thou not wish that the King should go down and redeem His
herald? David was there, and Samuel, and all the
Prophets686686 The same Old Testament
saints are named in xiv. 19, as redeemed by Christ in Hades., John himself also,
who by his messengers said, Art thou He that should come, or look we
for another687687Matt. xi. 3.? Wouldst thou
not wish that He should descend and redeem such as these?

Of the Resurrection.

12. But He who descended into the regions
beneath the earth came up again; and Jesus, who was buried, truly rose
again the third day. And if the Jews ever worry thee, meet them
at once by asking thus: Did Jonah come forth from the whale on
the third day, and hath not Christ then risen from the earth on the
third day? Is a dead man raised to life on touching the bones of
Elisha, and is it not much easier for the Maker of mankind to be raised
by the power of the Father? Well then, He truly rose, and after
He had risen was seen again of the disciples: and twelve
disciples were witnesses of His Resurrection, who bare witness not in
pleasing words, but contended even unto torture and death for the truth
of the Resurrection. What then, shall every word be
established at the mouth of two of three witnesses688688Deut. xix. 15., according to the Scripture, and, though
twelve bear witness to the Resurrection of Christ, art thou still
incredulous in regard to His Resurrection?

Concerning the Ascension.

13. But when Jesus had finished His course of
patient endurance, and had redeemed mankind from their sins, He
ascended again into the heavens, a cloud receiving Him up: and as
He went up Angels were beside Him, and Apostles were beholding.
But if any man disbelieves the words which I speak, let him believe the
actual power of the things now seen. All kings when they die have
their power extinguished with their life: but Christ crucified is
worshipped by the whole world. We proclaim The Crucified, and the
devils tremble now. Many have been crucified at various times;
but of what other who was crucified did the invocation ever drive the
devils away?

14. Let us, therefore, not be ashamed of the
Cross of Christ; but though another hide it, do thou openly seal it
upon thy forehead, that the devils may behold the royal sign and flee
trembling far away689689 Justin M.
Dialogue with Trypho, 247 C: We call Him Helper and
Redeemer, the power of whose Name even demons do fear; and at this day,
when exorcised in the name of Jesus Christ, crucified under Pontius
Pilate, Governor of Judæa, they are overcome.. Make then this
sign at eating and drinking, at sitting, at lying down, at rising up,
at speaking, at walking: in a word, at every act690690 Tertullian, de
Coronâ, 3: At every forward step and movement, at every
going in and out, when we put on our clothes and shoes, when we bathe,
when we sit at table, when we light the lamps, on couch, on seat, in
all the ordinary actions of daily life, we trace upon the forehead the
Sign. If for these, and other such rules, you insist upon having
positive Scripture injunction, you will find none. Tradition will
be held forth to you as the originator of them, custom as their
strengthener, and faith as their observer.. For He who was here crucified is in
heaven above. If after being crucified and buried He had remained
in the tomb, we should have had cause to be ashamed; but, in fact, He
who was crucified on Golgotha here, has ascended into heaven from the
Mount of Olives on the East. For after having gone down hence
into Hades, and come up again to us, He ascended again from us into
heaven, His Father addressing Him, and saying, Sit Thou on My right
hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool691691Ps. cx. 1..

Of Judgment to Come.

15. This Jesus Christ who is gone up shall
come again, not from earth but from heaven: and I say, “not
from earth,” because there are many Antichrists to come at this
time from earth. For already, as thou hast seen, many have begun
to say, I am the Christ692692Matt. xxiv. 5.: and the
abomination of desolation693693Matt. xxiv. 15. Compare Cat. xv. 9, 15. is yet to come,
assuming to himself the false title of Christ. But look thou for
the true Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God, coming henceforth no
more from earth, but from heaven, appearing to all more bright than any
lightning and brilliancy of light, with angel guards attended, that He
may judge both quick and dead, and reign in a heavenly, eternal
kingdom, which shall have no end. For on this point also, I pray
thee, make thyself sure, since there are many who say that
Christ’s Kingdom hath an end694694 Compare xv. 27, where
the followers of Marcellus of Ancyra are indicated as holding this
opinion..

16. Believe thou also in the Holy Ghost, and
hold the same opinion concerning Him, which thou hast received to
hold concerning the Father and the Son, and follow not those who
teach blasphemous things of Him695695 In xvi. 6–10,
Cyril gives a long list of heresies concerning the Holy Ghost.. But learn thou
that this Holy Spirit is One, indivisible, of manifold power; having
many operations, yet not Himself divided; Who knoweth the mysteries,
Who searcheth all things, even the deep things of God6966961 Cor. ii. 10.: Who descended upon the Lord Jesus
Christ in form of a dove; Who wrought in the Law and in the Prophets;
Who now also at the season of Baptism sealeth thy soul; of Whose
holiness also every intellectual nature hath need: against Whom
if any dare to blaspheme, he hath no forgiveness, neither in this
world, nor in that which is to come697697Matt. xii. 32.: “Who with the Father and the Son
together698698 This clause is not
in the Creed of Nicæa, but is added in the Creed of
Constantinople, a.d. 381.” is honoured
with the glory of the Godhead: of Whom also thrones, and
dominions, principalities, and powers have need699699Col. i. 16.. For there is One God, the Father of
Christ; and One Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of the Only
God; and One Holy Ghost, the sanctifier and deifier of all700700θεοποιόν is
omitted in Codd. Roe, Casaubon, and A., Who spake in the Law and in the Prophets, in
the Old and in the New Testament.

17. Have thou ever in thy mind this
seal701701 The Benedictine Editor
argues from Cat. i. 5, “that thou mayest by faith seal up the
things that are spoken;” and xxiii. 18: “sealing up
the Prayer by the Amen,” that Cyril means by “this
seal” the firm belief of Christian doctrine. Compare
John iii. 33. But Milles understands by the
“seal” the Creed itself, which agrees better with the
following context., which for the present has been lightly
touched in my discourse, by way of summary, but shall be stated, should
the Lord permit, to the best of my power with the proof from the
Scriptures. For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the
Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy
Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and
artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell thee these things, give
not absolute credence, unless thou receive the proof of the things
which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation
which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning702702ἡ σωτηρία γὰρ
αὕτη τῆς
πίστεως
ἡμῶν, which might be rendered, “this
our salvation by faith,” or, with Milles, “this safety of
our Faith.” For the rendering in the text compare
Heb. iii. 1: ἀρχιερέα τῆς
ὁμολογίας
ἡμῶν. On εὑρεσιλογία,
see Polybius xviii. 29, § 3: διὰ τῆς προς
ἀλλήλους
εὑρεσιλογίας.,
but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures.

Of the Soul.

18. Next to the knowledge of this venerable
and glorious and all-holy Faith, learn further what thou thyself
art: that as man thou art of a two-fold nature, consisting of
soul and body; and that, as was said a short time ago, the same God is
the Creator both of soul and body703703 iv. 4.. Know also
that thou hast a soul self-governed, the noblest work of God, made
after the image of its Creator704704 In the Clementine
Homily xvi. 16, the soul having come forth from God, clothed with His
breath, is said to be of the same substance, and yet not God. In
Tertull. c. Marcion II. c. 9, the soul is the
affatus (πνοή not πνεῦμα) of God, i.e. the
image of the Spirit, and inferior to it, though possessing the true
lineaments of divinity, immortality, freedom, its own mastery over
itself.: immortal
because of God that gives it immortality; a living being, rational,
imperishable, because of Him that bestowed these gifts: having
free power to do what it willeth705705 Tertull. c.
Marc. II. 6: It was proper that he who is the image and
likeness of God should be formed with a free will, and a mastery of
himself, so that this very thing, namely freedom of will and
self-command, might be reckoned as the image and likeness of God in
him.. For it is
not according to thy nativity that thou sinnest, nor is it by the power
of chance that thou committest fornication, nor, as some idly talk, do
the conjunctions of the stars compel thee to give thyself to
wantonness706706 Compare Aug. de Civ.
Dei. v. 1, where he says that the astrologers (Mathematici) say,
not merely such or such a position of Mars signifies that a man will be
a murderer, but makes him a murderer. See Dict. of Christian
Antiq., “Astrology.”. Why dost thou
shrink from confessing thine own evil deeds, and ascribe the blame to
the innocent stars? Give no more heed, pray, to astrologers; for
of these the divine Scripture saith, Let the stargazers of the
heaven stand up and save thee, and what follows: Behold,
they all shall be consumed as stubble on the fire, and shall not
deliver their soul from the flame707707Is. xlvii. 13..

19. And learn this also, that the soul,
before it came into this world, had committed no sin708708 “The Orphic poets
were under the impression that the soul is suffering the punishment of
sin, and that the body is an enclosure or prison in which the soul is
incarcerated and kept (σώζεται) as the name
σῶμα implies,
until the penalty is paid.” Plato, Cratyl.
400. Clement of Alexandria (Strom. III. iii. 17), after
referring to this passage of Plato, quotes Philolaus the Pythagorean,
as saying: “The ancient theologians and soothsayers also
testify that the soul has been chained to the body for a kind of
punishment, and is buried in it as in a tomb.“,
but having come in sinless, we now sin of our free-will. Listen
not, I pray thee, to any one perversely interpreting the words, But
if I do that which I would not709709Rom. vii. 16.: but
remember Him who saith, If ye be willing, and hearken unto Me, ye
shall eat the good things of the land: but if ye be not willing,
neither hearken unto Me, the sword shall devour you,
&c.710710Is. i. 19, 20.: and again,
As ye presented your members as servants to uncleanness and to
iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your members as servants to
righteousness unto sanctification711711Rom. vi. 19.. Remember
also the Scripture, which saith, Even as they did not like to retain
God in their knowledge712712Rom. i. 28.: and, That
which may be known of God is mani24festin them713713Rom. i. 19.; and again, their eyes they have
closed714714Matt. xiii. 15.. Also remember
how God again accuseth them, and saith, Yet I planted thee a
fruitful vine, wholly true: how art thou turned to bitterness,
thou the strange vine715715Jer. ii. 21.?

20. The soul is immortal, and all souls are
alike both of men and women; for only the members of the body are
distinguished716716 Apelles, the
heretic, attributed the difference of sex to the soul, which existing
before the body impressed its sex upon it. Tertull. On the
Soul, c. xxxvi.. There is not a
class of souls sinning by nature, and a class of souls practising
righteousness by nature717717 Irenæus I.
vii. 5: “They (the Valentinians) conceive of three kinds of
men, spiritual, material, and animal.…These three natures are no
longer found in one person, but constitute various kinds of
men.…And again subdividing the animal souls themselves, they say
that some are by nature good, and others by nature evil.”
Origen on Romans, Lib. VIII. § 10: “I know not
how those who come from the School of Valentinus and
Basilides…suppose that there are souls of one nature which are
always safe and never perish, and others which always perish, and are
never saved.”: but both act
from choice, the substance of their souls being of one kind only, and
alike in all. I know, however, that I am talking much, and that
the time is already long: but what is more precious than
salvation? Art thou not willing to take trouble in getting
provisions for the way against the heretics? And wilt thou not
learn the bye-paths of the road, lest from ignorance thou fall down a
precipice? If thy teachers think it no small gain for thee to
learn these things, shouldest not thou the learner gladly receive the
multitude of things told thee?

21. The soul is self-governed: and though
the devil can suggest, he has not the power to compel against the
will. He pictures to thee the thought of fornication: if
thou wilt, thou acceptest it; if thou wilt not, thou rejectest.
For if thou wert a fornicator by necessity, then for what cause did God
prepare hell? If thou were a doer of righteousness by nature and
not by will, wherefore did God prepare crowns of ineffable glory?
The sheep is gentle, but never was it crowned for its gentleness:
since its gentle quality belongs to it not from choice but by
nature.

Of the Body.

22. Thou hast learned, beloved, the nature
of the soul, as far as there is time at present: now do thy best
to receive the doctrine of the body also. Suffer none of those
who say that this body is no work of God718718 See iv. 18.: for they who believe that the body is
independent of God, and that the soul dwells in it as in a strange
vessel, readily abuse it to fornication719719 On the impure practices
of the Manichees, see vi. 33, 34.. And yet what fault have they found in
this wonderful body? For what is lacking in comeliness? And
what in its structure is not full of skill? Ought they not to
have observed the luminous construction of the eyes? And how the
ears being set obliquely receive the sound unhindered? And how
the smell is able to distinguish scents, and to perceive
exhalations? And how the tongue ministers to two purposes, the
sense of taste, and the power of speech? How the lungs placed out
of sight are unceasing in their respiration of the air? Who
imparted the incessant pulsation of the heart? Who made the
distribution into so many veins and arteries? Who skilfully
knitted together the bones with the sinews? Who assigned a part
of the food to our substance, and separated a part for decent
secretion, and hid away the unseemly members in more seemly
places? Who when the human race must have died out, rendered it
by a simple intercourse perpetual?

23. Tell me not that the body is a cause of
sin720720 Fortunatus, the
Manichee, in August. Disput. ii. 20, contra Fortunat. is
represented as saying, What we assert is this, that the soul is
compelled to sin by a substance of contrary nature.. For if the body is a cause of sin, why
does not a dead body sin? Put a sword in the right hand of one
just dead, and no murder takes place. Let beauties of every kind
pass before a youth just dead, and no impure desire arises.
Why? Because the body sins not of itself, but the soul through
the body. The body is an instrument, and, as it were, a garment
and robe of the soul: and if by this latter it be given over to
fornication, it becomes defiled: but if it dwell with a holy
soul, it becomes a temple of the Holy Ghost. It is not I that say
this, but the Apostle Paul hath said, Know ye not, that your bodies
are the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you7217211 Cor. vi. 19.? Be tender, therefore, of thy body as
being a temple of the Holy Ghost. Pollute not thy flesh in
fornication: defile not this thy fairest robe: and if ever
thou hast defiled it, now cleanse it by repentance: get thyself
washed, while time permits.

24. And to the doctrine of chastity let the
first to give heed be the order of Solitaries722722μονάζοντες.
Compare xii. 33; xvi. 22. The origin of Monasticism is usually
traced to the time of the Decian persecution, the middle of the third
century. Previously “there were no monks, but only ascetics
in the Church; from that time to the reign of Constantine, Monachism
was confined to the anchorets living in private cells in the
wilderness: but when Pachomius had erected monasteries in Egypt,
other countries presently followed the example.…Hilarion, who was
scholar to Antonius, was the first monk that ever lived in Palestine or
Syria.” Bingham, VII. i. 4. and
of Virgins, who maintain the angelic life in the world; and let the
rest of the Church’s people follow them. For you, brethren,
a great crown is laid up: barter not away a great dignity for a
petty pleasure: listen to the Apostle speaking: Lest
there be any fornicator or profane person, as Esau, who for one mess
of 25meat sold his own
birthright723723Heb. xii. 16.. Enrolled
henceforth in the Angelic books for thy profession of chastity, see
that thou be not blotted out again for thy practice of fornication.

25. Nor again, on the other hand, in
maintaining thy chastity be thou puffed up against those who walk in
the humbler path of matrimony. For as the Apostle saith, Let
marriage be had in honour among all, and let the bed be
undefiled724724Heb. xiii. 4.. Thou too who
retainest thy chastity, wast thou not begotten of those who had
married? Because thou hast a possession of gold, do not on that
account reprobate the silver. But let those also be of good
cheer, who being married use marriage lawfully; who make a marriage
according to God’s ordinance, and not of wantonness for the sake
of unbounded license; who recognise seasons of abstinence, that they
may give themselves unto prayer7257251 Cor. vii. 5.; who in our
assemblies bring clean bodies as well as clean garments into the
Church; who have entered upon matrimony for the procreation of
children, but not for indulgence.

26. Let those also who marry but once not
reprobate those who have consented to a second marriage726726 The condemnation of a
second marriage, which the Benedictine Editor and others import into
this passage, is not to be found in it. τοὺς
δευτέρῳ γάμῳ
συμπεριενεχθέντας
neither means “qui ad secundas nuptias ultro se
dejecere,” nor even “who have involved
themselves” (R.W.C.), but simply “who have consented
to,”—or, “consented together in—a second
marriage,” without any intimation of censure. See V. 9; VI.
13: Ecclus. xxv. 1; γυνὴ καὶ
ἁνὴρ ἑαυτοῖς
συμπεριφερόμενοι;
2 Macc. ix. 27; Euseb. H. E. ix. 9,
7: ἀνεξικάκως
καὶ
συμμέτρως
συμπεριφέροιντο
αὐτοῖς; Zeno, ap. Diog.
Laert. vii. 18; τὸ
συμπεριφερεσθαι
τοῖς
φίλοις. Diog. Laert.
vii. 13: εὐσυμπερίφορος.
Polyb. IV. 35, § 7, and II. 17, § 12. The gentleness
with which Cyril here speaks of second marriages is in striking
contrast with the passionate vehemence of Tertullian in the treatise
de Monogamia, and elsewhere. Aug. de
Hæresibus, cc. 26, 38, reckons the condemnation of second
marriage among the heretical doctrines of the Montanists and
Cathari. In the treatise de Bono Viduitatis, c. 6, he
argues that a second marriage is not to be condemned, but is less
honourable than widowhood, and severely rebukes the heretical teaching
on this point of Tertullian, the Montanists, and the Novatians.
De Bono Conjugali, c. 21: Sacramentum nuptiarum temporis
nostri sic ad unum virum et unam uxorem redactum est, ut Ecclesiæ
dispensatorem non liceat ordinare nisi unius uxoris virum.
On the practice of the Church at various times see Bingham, IV. v.
1–4; Suicer, Thesaur. Διγαμία.: for though continence is a noble and
admirable thing, yet it is also permissible to enter upon a second
marriage, that the weak may not fall into fornication. For it
is good for them, saith the Apostle, if they abide even as
I. But if they have not continency, let them marry: for it
is better to marry than to burn7277271 Cor. vii. 8, 9.. But let
all the other practices be banished afar, fornication, adultery, and
every kind of licentiousness: and let the body be kept pure for
the Lord, that the Lord also may have respect unto the body. And
let the body be nourished with food, that it may live, and serve
without hindrance; not, however, that it may be given up to
luxuries.

Concerning Meats.

27. And concerning food let these be your
ordinances, since in regard to meats also many stumble. For some
deal indifferently with things offered to idols728728 The Nicolaitans
(Apocal. ii. 14, 20); and the Valentinians, of whom Irenæus
(II. xiv. 5), says that they derived their opinion as to the
indifference of meats from the Cynics. See also Irenæus I.
vi. 3; and xxvi. 3.,
while others discipline themselves, but condemn those that eat:
and in different ways men’s souls are defiled in the matter of
meats, from ignorance of the useful reasons for eating and not
eating. For we fast by abstaining from wine and flesh, not
because we abhor them as abominations, but because we look for our
reward; that having scorned things sensible, we may enjoy a spiritual
and intellectual feast; and that having now sown in tears we may
reap in joy729729Ps. cxxvi. 5. in the world to
come. Despise not therefore them that eat, and because of the
weakness of their bodies partake of food: nor yet blame these who
use a little wine for their stomach’s sake and their often
infirmities7307301 Tim. v. 23.: and neither
condemn the men as sinners, nor abhor the flesh as strange food; for
the Apostle knows some of this sort, when he says: forbidding
to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God created to be
received with thanksgiving by them that believe7317311 Tim. iv. 3.. In abstaining then from these things,
abstain not as from things abominable732732 The various sects of
Gnostics, and the Manichees, considered certain meats and drinks, as
flesh and wine, to be polluting. Vid. Iren. Hær. i.
28. Clem. Pæd. ii. 2. p. 186. Epiph.
Hær. xlvi. 2, xlvii. 1, &c., &c. August.
Hær. 46, vid. Canon. Apost. 43.
“If any Bishop, &c., abstain from marriage, flesh, and wine,
not for discipline (δι᾽
ἄσκησιν) but as
abhorring them, forgetting that they are all very good, &c., and
speaking blasphemy against the creation, let him amend or be
deposed,” &c. R.W.C., else thou hast
no reward: but as being good things disregard them for the sake
of the better spiritual things set before thee.

28. Guard thy soul safely, lest at any time
thou eat of things offered to idols: for concerning meats of this
kind, not only I at this time, but ere now Apostles also, and James the
bishop of this Church, have had earnest care: and the Apostles
and Elders write a Catholic epistle to all the Gentiles, that they
should abstain first from things offered to idols, and
then from blood also and from things strangled733733Acts xv. 20, 29. The prohibition of blood
and things strangled has continued to the present day in the Eastern
Church, though already disregarded by the Latins in the time of S.
Augustine (c. Faustum. xxxii. 13).. For many men being of savage nature,
and living like dogs, both lap up blood734734 Tertullian
(Apologeticus, c. 9) speaks of those “who at the gladiator
shows, for the cure of epilepsy, quaff with greedy thirst the blood of
criminals slain in the arena,” and of others “who make
meals on the flesh of wild beasts at the place of combat:”
and contrasts the habits of Christians, who abstain from things
strangled, to avoid pollution by the blood., in
imitation of the manner of the 26fiercest beasts, and greedily devour things
strangled. But do thou, the servant of Christ, in eating observe
to eat with reverence. And so enough concerning meats.

Of Apparel.

29. But let thine apparel be plain, not for
adornment, but for necessary covering: not to minister to thy
vanity, but to keep thee warm in winter, and to hide the unseemliness
of the body: lest under pretence of hiding the unseemliness, thou
fall into another kind of unseemliness by thy extravagant dress.

Of the Resurrection.

30. Be tender, I beseech thee, of this body,
and understand that thou wilt be raised from the dead, to be judged
with this body. But if there steal into thy mind any thought of
unbelief, as though the thing were impossible, judge of the things
unseen by what happens to thyself. For tell me; a hundred years
ago or more, think where wast thou thyself: and from what a most
minute and mean substance thou art come to so great a stature, and so
much dignity of beauty735735 XVIII. 9.. What
then? Cannot He who brought the non-existent into being, raise up
again that which already exists and has decayed736736 Compare xviii. 6,
9; Athenagoras, On the Resurrection of the Dead, c.
3.? He who raises the corn, which is sown
for our sakes, as year by year it dies,—will He have difficulty
in raising us up, for whose sakes that corn also has been
raised737737 XVIII. 6.
John xii. 24; 1 Cor. xv.
36.? Seest thou how the trees stand now for
many months without either fruit or leaves: but when the winter
is past they spring up whole into life again as if from the
dead738738 XVIII. 7.: shall not we much rather and more
easily return to life? The rod of Moses was transformed by the
will of God into the unfamiliar nature of a serpent: and cannot a
man, who has fallen into death, be restored to himself
again?

31. Heed not those who say that this body is
not raised; for it is raised: and Esaias is witness, when he
says: The dead shall arise, and they that are in the tombs
shall awake739739Is. xxvi. 19.: and according
to Daniel, Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall
arise, some to everlasting life, and some to everlasting
shame740740Dan. xii. 2.. But though to
rise again is common to all men, yet the resurrection is not alike to
all: for the bodies received by us all are eternal, but not like
bodies by all: for the just receive them, that through eternity
they may join the Choirs of Angels; but the sinners, that they may
endure for ever the torment of their sins.

Of the Laver.

32. For this cause the Lord, preventing us
according to His loving-kindness, has granted repentance at
Baptism741741 Gr. λουτροῦ
μετάνοιαν.
Other readings are λύτρον
μετανοίας,
“redemption by repentance,” and λουτρὸν
μετανοίας “a
laver (baptism) of repentance.”, in order that we may cast off the
chief—nay rather the whole burden of our sins, and having
received the seal by the Holy Ghost, may be made heirs of eternal
life. But as we have spoken sufficiently concerning the Laver the
day before yesterday, let us now return to the remaining subjects of
our introductory teaching.

Of the Divine Scriptures.

33. Now these the divinely-inspired
Scriptures of both the Old and the New Testament teach us. For
the God of the two Testaments is One, Who in the Old Testament foretold
the Christ Who appeared in the New; Who by the Law and the Prophets led
us to Christ’s school. For before faith came, we were
kept in ward under the law, and, the law hath been our tutor to
bring us unto Christ742742Gal. iii. 24. The Παιδαγωγός
is described by Clement of Alexandria (Paedag. i. 7) as one who
both conducts a boy to school, and helps to teach him,—an
usher: “under-master” (Wicliff).. And if ever
thou hear any of the heretics speaking evil of the Law or the Prophets,
answer in the sound of the Saviour’s voice, saying, Jesus came
not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it743743Matt. v. 17.. Learn also diligently, and from the
Church, what are the books of the Old Testament, and what those of the
New. And, pray, read none of the apocryphal writings744744τῶν
ἀποκρύφων.
The sense in which Cyril uses this term may be learned from Rufinus
(Expositio Symboli, § 38), who distinguishes three
classes of books: (1) The Canonical Books of the Old and New
Testaments, which alone are to be used in proof of doctrine; (2)
Ecclesiastical, which may be read in Churches, including Wisdom,
Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees, in the
Old Testament, and The Shepherd of Hermas, and The Two
Ways in the New Testament; (3) The other writings they called
“Apocryphal,” which they would not have read in
Churches. The distinction is useful, though the second class is
not complete.: for why dost thou, who knowest not
those which are acknowledged among all, trouble thyself in vain about
those which are disputed? Read the Divine Scriptures, the
twenty-two books of the Old Testament, these that have been translated
by the Seventy-two Interpreters745745 The original source of
this account of the Septuagint version is a letter purporting to have
been written by Aristeas, or Aristæus, a confidential minister of
Ptolemy Philadelphus, to his brother Philocrates. Though the
letter is not regarded as genuine its statements are in part admitted
to be true, being confirmed by a fragment, preserved by Eusebius
(Præparatio Evangelica, ix. 6.), of a work of
Aristobulus, a Jewish philosopher who wrote in the reign of Ptolemy
Philometor, 181–146, b.c. Upon
these testimonies it is generally admitted that “the whole
Law,” i.e. the Pentateuch was translated into Greek at Alexandria
in the reign either of Ptolemy Soter (323–285, b.c.), or of his son Ptolemy Philadelphus (285–247,
b.c.), under the direction of Demetrius
Phalereus, curator of the King’s library..

2734. For
after the death of Alexander, the king of the Macedonians, and the
division of his kingdom into four principalities, into Babylonia, and
Macedonia, and Asia, and Egypt, one of those who reigned over Egypt,
Ptolemy Philadelphus, being a king very fond of learning, while
collecting the books that were in every place, heard from Demetrius
Phalereus, the curator of his library, of the Divine Scriptures of the
Law and the Prophets, and judged it much nobler, not to get the books
from the possessors by force against their will, but rather to
propitiate them by gifts and friendship; and knowing that what is
extorted is often adulterated, being given unwillingly, while that
which is willingly supplied is freely given with all sincerity, he sent
to Eleazar, who was then High Priest, a great many gifts for the Temple
here at Jerusalem, and caused him to send him six interpreters from
each of the twelve tribes of Israel for the translation746746 Up to this point
Cyril’s account is based upon the statements of the
Pseudo-Aristeas. The fabulous incidents which follow, concerning
the separate cells, the completion of the whole version by each
translator, the miraculous agreement in the very words, proving a
Divine inspiration, are found in Philo Judæus, Life of
Moses, II. 7. Josephus, Antiquities, XII. c.
ii. 3–14, following the letter of Aristeas, gives long
descriptions of the magnificent presents sent by Philadelphus to
Jerusalem, and of his splendid hospitality to the translators, but
makes no allusion to the separate cells or miraculous agreement.
On the contrary he represents the 72 interpreters as meeting together
for consultation, agreeing on the text to be adopted, and completing
their joint labours in 72 days. The slightest comparison of the
Version with the original Hebrew must convince any reasonable person
that the idea of divine inspiration or supernatural assistance,
borrowed by Justin Martyr, Irenæus, and other Fathers, apparently
from Philo, is a mere invention of the imagination, disproved by the
facts. Compare the article “Septuagint” in
Murray’s Dictionary of the Bible.. Then, further, to make experiment
whether the books were Divine or not, he took precaution that those who
had been sent should not combine among themselves, by assigning to each
of the interpreters who had come his separate chamber in the island
called Pharos, which lies over against Alexandria, and committed to
each the whole Scriptures to translate. And when they had
fulfilled the task in seventy-two days, he brought together all their
translations, which they had made in different chambers without sending
them one to another, and found that they agreed not only in the sense
but even in words. For the process was no word-craft, nor
contrivance of human devices: but the translation of the Divine
Scriptures, spoken by the Holy Ghost, was of the Holy Ghost
accomplished.

35. Of these read the two and twenty books,
but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study
earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far
wiser and more pious than thyself were the Apostles, and the bishops of
old time, the presidents of the Church who handed down these
books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench747747 The rendering
“trench not” (R.W.C.) agrees well
with the etymology of the verb (παραχαράσσω).
Its more usual signification seems to be “counterfeit,”
“forge.” The sense required here, apart from any
metaphor, is “transgress” (Heurtley). thou not upon its statutes. And of the
Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which,
if thou art desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I
recite them. For of the Law the books of Moses are the first
five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next,
Joshua the son of Nave748748 The name
“Nun” is represented by “Nave” in the
Septuagint, which Cyril used., and the book of
Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other
historical books, the first and second books of the Kings749749 The two books of
Samuel. are among the Hebrews one book; also the
third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and
second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second
of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these
are the Historical writings. But those which are written in
verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and
Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth
book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the
Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including
Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle750750 The Epistle of Jeremy,
which now appears in the Apocrypha as the last chapter of Baruch.
On the number and arrangement of the Books of the Old and New
Testaments the student should consult an interesting Essay by Professor
Sanday (Studia Biblica, vol. iii.), who traces the
introduction of a fixed order to the time when papyrus rolls
were superseded by codices, in which the sheets of skin were
folded and bound together, as in printed books. This change had
commenced before the Diocletian persecution, a.d. 303, when among the sacred books taken from the
Christians codices were much more numerous than
rolls. On the contents of the Jewish Canon, see Dictionary
of the Bible, “Canon.” B.F.W. “Josephus
enumerates 20 books ‘which are justly believed to be
divine.’” One of the earliest attempts by a Christian
to ascertain correctly the number and order of the Books of the O.T.
was made by Melito, Bishop of Sardis, who travelled for this purpose to
Palestine, in the latter part of the 2nd Century. His list is as
follows:—“Of Moses five (books); Genesis, Exodus, Numbers,
Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Jesus son of Nave, Judges, Ruth, four Books of
Kings, two of Chronicles, Psalms of David, Solomon’s Proverbs,
which is also called Wisdom, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job,
Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, the Twelve in one Book, Daniel, Ezekiel,
Esdras.” (Eusebius, H.E. III. cap. 10, note I, in
this series.) Cyril’s List agrees with that of Athanasius
(Festal Epistle, 373 a.d.), except that
Job is placed by Ath. after Canticles instead of before
Psalms.; then
Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old
Testament.

36. Then of the New Testament there are the
four Gospels only, for the rest have false titles751751 Gr. ψευδεπίγραφα. For an account of the many Apocryphal Gospels, see the article
by Lipsius in the “Dictionary of Christian
Biography,” Smith and Wace, and the English translations in
Clark’s Ante-Nicene Library.
and are mischievous. The Manichæans also wrote a Gospel
according to Thomas, which being tinctured with the fragrance of the
evangelic title corrupts the souls of the simple sort. Receive
also the Acts of the Twelve Apostles; and in addition to these the
seven 28Catholic
Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude; and as a seal upon them all,
and the last work of the disciples, the fourteen Epistles of
Paul752752 Cyril includes in
this list all the books which we receive, except the Apocalypse.
See Bishop Westcott’s Article “Canon,” in the
Dictionary of the Bible, and Origen’s Catalogue in Euseb.
Hist. vi. 25 (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol.
i.).. But let all the rest be put aside in a
secondary rank. And whatever books are not read in Churches,
these read not even by thyself, as thou hast heard me say. Thus
much of these subjects.

37. But shun thou every diabolical
operation, and believe not the apostate Serpent, whose transformation
from a good nature was of his own free choice: who can
over-persuade the willing, but can compel no one. Also give heed
neither to observations of the stars nor auguries, nor omens, nor to
the fabulous divinations of the Greeks753753 Compare xix. 8. where
all such acts of divination are said to be service of the devil.. Witchcraft, and enchantment, and the
wicked practices of necromancy, admit not even to a hearing. From
every kind of intemperance stand aloof, giving thyself neither to
gluttony nor licentiousness, rising superior to all covetousness and
usury. Neither venture thyself at heathen assemblies for public
spectacles, nor ever use amulets in sicknesses; shun also all the
vulgarity of tavern-haunting. Fall not away either into the sect
of the Samaritans, or into Judaism: for Jesus Christ henceforth
hath ransomed thee. Stand aloof from all observance of
Sabbaths754754 Compare Gal. iv. 10, “Ye observe days.”, and from calling any
indifferent meats common or unclean. But especially abhor
all the assemblies of wicked heretics; and in every way make thine own
soul safe, by fastings, prayers, almsgivings, and reading the oracles
of God; that having lived the rest of thy life in the flesh in
soberness and godly doctrine, thou mayest enjoy the one salvation which
flows from Baptism; and thus enrolled in the armies of heaven by God
and the Father, mayest also be deemed worthy of the heavenly crowns, in
Christ Jesus our Lord, to Whom be the glory for ever and ever.
Amen.

638 The number
“ten” is confirmed by Theodoret, who quotes the article on
Christ’s “Birth of the Virgin” as from Cyril’s
fourth Catechetical Lecture “On the ten Doctrines.”
The mss. vary between “ten” and
“eleven,” and differ also in the special titles and
numeration of the separate Articles.

640Job xli. 24, Sept.;
xli.
15: ἡ καρδία
αὐτοῦ…ἕστηκεν
ὥσπερ ἄκμων
ἀνήλατος. These
statements concerning the Devil seem to be directed against
Origen’s opinion (De Principiis I. 2), that the Angels
“who have been removed from their primal state of blessedness
have not been removed irrecoverably.” The question is
discussed, and the opinions of several Fathers quoted, by Huet,
Origeniana, II. c. 25.

641Matt. vii. 15. The same text is applied to
Heretics by Ignatius, Philadelph. ii. and by Irenæus, L. I.
c. i. § 2.

649 Compare Rom. vi. 17: “that form of
teaching whereunto ye were delivered.” The instruction
of Catechumens in the Articles of the Faith was commonly called the
“Traditio Symboli,” or “Delivery of the
Creed.”

652 Irenæus, I.
c. xxvii. says that Cerdo taught that the God of the Law and the
Prophets was not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: for that He
is known, but the other unknown, and the one is just, but the other
good. Also III. c. 25, § 3: “Marcion himself,
therefore, by dividing God into two, and calling the one good, and the
other judicial, on both sides puts an end to Deity.”
Compare Tertullian, c. Marcion. I. 2, and 6; Origen,
c. Cels. iv. 54.

653 This tenet was
held by the Manichæans and other heretics, and is traced back to
the Apostolic age by Bishop Pearson (Exposition of the Creed,
Art. i. p. 79, note c). Compare Athanasius c.Apollinarium, I. 21; II. 8; c.Gentes, § 6; de Incarnatione, § 2, in
this series, and Augustine (c. Faustum, xx. 15,
21, and xxi. 4).

666 Clement of Alexandria
(Protrept. c. iv. § 53, Klotz) states that the
courtesan Phryne was taken as a model for Aphrodite.
“Praxiteles when fashioning the statue of Aphrodite of Cnidus
made it like the form of Cratine his paramour.”
Ibid.

668τῆς
μοναρχίας
τοῦ θεοῦ. See note on
the title of Cat. VI. Praxeas made use of the term
“Monarchy” to exclude the Son (and the Spirit) from the
Godhead. Tertullian in his treatise against Praxeas maintains the
true doctrine that the Son is no obstacle to the
“Monarchy,” because He is of the substance of the Father,
does nothing without the Father’s will, and has received all
power from the Father, to Whom He will in the end deliver up the
kingdom. In this sense Dionysius, Bishop of Rome, speaks of the
Divine Monarchy as “that most sacred doctrine of the Church of
God.” Compare Athanas. de Decretis, Nic. Syn. c. vi.
§ 3 and Dr. Newman’s note. In Orat. iv.
c. Arian. p 606 (617), Athanasius derives the term
from ἀρχή, in the sense of
“beginning:” οὕτως μία
ἀρχὴ
θεότητος καὶ
οὐ δύο ἀρχαί,
ὅθεν κυρίως
καὶ μοναρχία
ἐστίν. See the full discussion
of Monarchianism in Athanasius, p. xxiii. ff. in this series,
and Newman’s Introduction to Athan. Or. iv.

675 This was a point
earnestly maintained by the orthodox Bishops at Nicæa, that the
Son begotten of the substance of the Father is ever inseparably in the
Father. Athan. de Decretis Syn. c. 20 ; Tertullian
c. Marc. IV. c. 6. Cf. Ignat. ad Trall. vi.
(Long Recension): τὸν
μὲν γὰρ
Χριστὸν
ἀλλοτριουσι
τοῦ Πατρός.

676υἱοπατορία.
A term of derision applied to the doctrine of Sabellius. Compare
Athanas. Expositio Fidei, c. 2: “neither do we
imagine a Son-Father, as the Sabellians.” See Index,
Υιοπάτωρ.

677Λόγος
προφορικός, the term used by Paul of Samosata, implied that the Word was
impersonal, being conceived as a particular activity of God. See
Dorner, Person of Christ, Div. I. vol. ii. p. 436 (English
Tr.): and compare Athanasius, Expositio Fidei, c.
1; υἱὸν ἐκ
τοῦ Πατρὸς
ἀνάρχως καὶ
ἀϊδίως
γεγεννημένον,
λόγον δὲ οὐ
προφορικόν,
οὐκ
ἐνδιάθετον.
Cardinal Newman (Athan. c. Arianos, I. 7, note) observes that
some Christian writers of the 2nd Century “seem to speak of the
Divine generation as taking place immediately before the creation of
the world, that is, as if not eternal, though at the same time they
teach that our Lord existed before that generation. In other
words they seem to teach that He was the Word from eternity, and became
the Son at the beginning of all things; some of them expressly
considering Him, first as the λόγος
ἐνδιάθετος,
or Reason, in the Father, or (as may be speciously represented) a mere
attribute; next, as the λόγος
προφορικός,
or Word.” The terms λόγος
ἐνδιάθετος,
or ‘word conceived in the mind,’ and λόγος
προφορικός,
or ‘word expressed’ (emissum, or prolalivum),
were in use among the Gnostics (Iren. II. c. 12, §
5). As applied to the Son both terms, though sometimes used in a
right sense, were condemned as inadequate. Compare xi. 10.

681 Valentinus the Gnostic
taught that God produced a Son of an animal nature who “passed
through Mary just as water through a tube, and that on him the Saviour
descended at his Baptism.” Irenæus, I. vii. 2.

682 The words which the
Benedictine Editor introduces in the brackets are found in Theodoret,
and adopted by recent Editors, with Codd. M.A.

684 The discovery of
the “True Cross” is related with many marvellous
particulars by Socrates, Eccles. Hist. i. 17; and Sozomen, E.
H. ii. 1. A portion was said to have been left by Helena at
Jerusalem, enclosed in a silver case; and another portion sent to
Constantinople, where Constantine privately enclosed it in his own
statue, to be a safeguard to the city. Eusebius, Life of
Constantine, iii. 25–30 , gives a long account of the
discovery of the Holy Sepulchre, but makes no mention of the
Cross. Cyril seems to have been the first to record it, 25 years
after. Cf. Greg. Nyss. Bapt. Christi (p. 519).

689 Justin M.
Dialogue with Trypho, 247 C: We call Him Helper and
Redeemer, the power of whose Name even demons do fear; and at this day,
when exorcised in the name of Jesus Christ, crucified under Pontius
Pilate, Governor of Judæa, they are overcome.

690 Tertullian, de
Coronâ, 3: At every forward step and movement, at every
going in and out, when we put on our clothes and shoes, when we bathe,
when we sit at table, when we light the lamps, on couch, on seat, in
all the ordinary actions of daily life, we trace upon the forehead the
Sign. If for these, and other such rules, you insist upon having
positive Scripture injunction, you will find none. Tradition will
be held forth to you as the originator of them, custom as their
strengthener, and faith as their observer.

701 The Benedictine Editor
argues from Cat. i. 5, “that thou mayest by faith seal up the
things that are spoken;” and xxiii. 18: “sealing up
the Prayer by the Amen,” that Cyril means by “this
seal” the firm belief of Christian doctrine. Compare
John iii. 33. But Milles understands by the
“seal” the Creed itself, which agrees better with the
following context.

704 In the Clementine
Homily xvi. 16, the soul having come forth from God, clothed with His
breath, is said to be of the same substance, and yet not God. In
Tertull. c. Marcion II. c. 9, the soul is the
affatus (πνοή not πνεῦμα) of God, i.e. the
image of the Spirit, and inferior to it, though possessing the true
lineaments of divinity, immortality, freedom, its own mastery over
itself.

705 Tertull. c.
Marc. II. 6: It was proper that he who is the image and
likeness of God should be formed with a free will, and a mastery of
himself, so that this very thing, namely freedom of will and
self-command, might be reckoned as the image and likeness of God in
him.

706 Compare Aug. de Civ.
Dei. v. 1, where he says that the astrologers (Mathematici) say,
not merely such or such a position of Mars signifies that a man will be
a murderer, but makes him a murderer. See Dict. of Christian
Antiq., “Astrology.”

708 “The Orphic poets
were under the impression that the soul is suffering the punishment of
sin, and that the body is an enclosure or prison in which the soul is
incarcerated and kept (σώζεται) as the name
σῶμα implies,
until the penalty is paid.” Plato, Cratyl.
400. Clement of Alexandria (Strom. III. iii. 17), after
referring to this passage of Plato, quotes Philolaus the Pythagorean,
as saying: “The ancient theologians and soothsayers also
testify that the soul has been chained to the body for a kind of
punishment, and is buried in it as in a tomb.“

716 Apelles, the
heretic, attributed the difference of sex to the soul, which existing
before the body impressed its sex upon it. Tertull. On the
Soul, c. xxxvi.

717 Irenæus I.
vii. 5: “They (the Valentinians) conceive of three kinds of
men, spiritual, material, and animal.…These three natures are no
longer found in one person, but constitute various kinds of
men.…And again subdividing the animal souls themselves, they say
that some are by nature good, and others by nature evil.”
Origen on Romans, Lib. VIII. § 10: “I know not
how those who come from the School of Valentinus and
Basilides…suppose that there are souls of one nature which are
always safe and never perish, and others which always perish, and are
never saved.”

722μονάζοντες.
Compare xii. 33; xvi. 22. The origin of Monasticism is usually
traced to the time of the Decian persecution, the middle of the third
century. Previously “there were no monks, but only ascetics
in the Church; from that time to the reign of Constantine, Monachism
was confined to the anchorets living in private cells in the
wilderness: but when Pachomius had erected monasteries in Egypt,
other countries presently followed the example.…Hilarion, who was
scholar to Antonius, was the first monk that ever lived in Palestine or
Syria.” Bingham, VII. i. 4.

726 The condemnation of a
second marriage, which the Benedictine Editor and others import into
this passage, is not to be found in it. τοὺς
δευτέρῳ γάμῳ
συμπεριενεχθέντας
neither means “qui ad secundas nuptias ultro se
dejecere,” nor even “who have involved
themselves” (R.W.C.), but simply “who have consented
to,”—or, “consented together in—a second
marriage,” without any intimation of censure. See V. 9; VI.
13: Ecclus. xxv. 1; γυνὴ καὶ
ἁνὴρ ἑαυτοῖς
συμπεριφερόμενοι;
2 Macc. ix. 27; Euseb. H. E. ix. 9,
7: ἀνεξικάκως
καὶ
συμμέτρως
συμπεριφέροιντο
αὐτοῖς; Zeno, ap. Diog.
Laert. vii. 18; τὸ
συμπεριφερεσθαι
τοῖς
φίλοις. Diog. Laert.
vii. 13: εὐσυμπερίφορος.
Polyb. IV. 35, § 7, and II. 17, § 12. The gentleness
with which Cyril here speaks of second marriages is in striking
contrast with the passionate vehemence of Tertullian in the treatise
de Monogamia, and elsewhere. Aug. de
Hæresibus, cc. 26, 38, reckons the condemnation of second
marriage among the heretical doctrines of the Montanists and
Cathari. In the treatise de Bono Viduitatis, c. 6, he
argues that a second marriage is not to be condemned, but is less
honourable than widowhood, and severely rebukes the heretical teaching
on this point of Tertullian, the Montanists, and the Novatians.
De Bono Conjugali, c. 21: Sacramentum nuptiarum temporis
nostri sic ad unum virum et unam uxorem redactum est, ut Ecclesiæ
dispensatorem non liceat ordinare nisi unius uxoris virum.
On the practice of the Church at various times see Bingham, IV. v.
1–4; Suicer, Thesaur. Διγαμία.

728 The Nicolaitans
(Apocal. ii. 14, 20); and the Valentinians, of whom Irenæus
(II. xiv. 5), says that they derived their opinion as to the
indifference of meats from the Cynics. See also Irenæus I.
vi. 3; and xxvi. 3.

732 The various sects of
Gnostics, and the Manichees, considered certain meats and drinks, as
flesh and wine, to be polluting. Vid. Iren. Hær. i.
28. Clem. Pæd. ii. 2. p. 186. Epiph.
Hær. xlvi. 2, xlvii. 1, &c., &c. August.
Hær. 46, vid. Canon. Apost. 43.
“If any Bishop, &c., abstain from marriage, flesh, and wine,
not for discipline (δι᾽
ἄσκησιν) but as
abhorring them, forgetting that they are all very good, &c., and
speaking blasphemy against the creation, let him amend or be
deposed,” &c. R.W.C.

733Acts xv. 20, 29. The prohibition of blood
and things strangled has continued to the present day in the Eastern
Church, though already disregarded by the Latins in the time of S.
Augustine (c. Faustum. xxxii. 13).

734 Tertullian
(Apologeticus, c. 9) speaks of those “who at the gladiator
shows, for the cure of epilepsy, quaff with greedy thirst the blood of
criminals slain in the arena,” and of others “who make
meals on the flesh of wild beasts at the place of combat:”
and contrasts the habits of Christians, who abstain from things
strangled, to avoid pollution by the blood.

744τῶν
ἀποκρύφων.
The sense in which Cyril uses this term may be learned from Rufinus
(Expositio Symboli, § 38), who distinguishes three
classes of books: (1) The Canonical Books of the Old and New
Testaments, which alone are to be used in proof of doctrine; (2)
Ecclesiastical, which may be read in Churches, including Wisdom,
Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees, in the
Old Testament, and The Shepherd of Hermas, and The Two
Ways in the New Testament; (3) The other writings they called
“Apocryphal,” which they would not have read in
Churches. The distinction is useful, though the second class is
not complete.

745 The original source of
this account of the Septuagint version is a letter purporting to have
been written by Aristeas, or Aristæus, a confidential minister of
Ptolemy Philadelphus, to his brother Philocrates. Though the
letter is not regarded as genuine its statements are in part admitted
to be true, being confirmed by a fragment, preserved by Eusebius
(Præparatio Evangelica, ix. 6.), of a work of
Aristobulus, a Jewish philosopher who wrote in the reign of Ptolemy
Philometor, 181–146, b.c. Upon
these testimonies it is generally admitted that “the whole
Law,” i.e. the Pentateuch was translated into Greek at Alexandria
in the reign either of Ptolemy Soter (323–285, b.c.), or of his son Ptolemy Philadelphus (285–247,
b.c.), under the direction of Demetrius
Phalereus, curator of the King’s library.

746 Up to this point
Cyril’s account is based upon the statements of the
Pseudo-Aristeas. The fabulous incidents which follow, concerning
the separate cells, the completion of the whole version by each
translator, the miraculous agreement in the very words, proving a
Divine inspiration, are found in Philo Judæus, Life of
Moses, II. 7. Josephus, Antiquities, XII. c.
ii. 3–14, following the letter of Aristeas, gives long
descriptions of the magnificent presents sent by Philadelphus to
Jerusalem, and of his splendid hospitality to the translators, but
makes no allusion to the separate cells or miraculous agreement.
On the contrary he represents the 72 interpreters as meeting together
for consultation, agreeing on the text to be adopted, and completing
their joint labours in 72 days. The slightest comparison of the
Version with the original Hebrew must convince any reasonable person
that the idea of divine inspiration or supernatural assistance,
borrowed by Justin Martyr, Irenæus, and other Fathers, apparently
from Philo, is a mere invention of the imagination, disproved by the
facts. Compare the article “Septuagint” in
Murray’s Dictionary of the Bible.

747 The rendering
“trench not” (R.W.C.) agrees well
with the etymology of the verb (παραχαράσσω).
Its more usual signification seems to be “counterfeit,”
“forge.” The sense required here, apart from any
metaphor, is “transgress” (Heurtley).

748 The name
“Nun” is represented by “Nave” in the
Septuagint, which Cyril used.

750 The Epistle of Jeremy,
which now appears in the Apocrypha as the last chapter of Baruch.
On the number and arrangement of the Books of the Old and New
Testaments the student should consult an interesting Essay by Professor
Sanday (Studia Biblica, vol. iii.), who traces the
introduction of a fixed order to the time when papyrus rolls
were superseded by codices, in which the sheets of skin were
folded and bound together, as in printed books. This change had
commenced before the Diocletian persecution, a.d. 303, when among the sacred books taken from the
Christians codices were much more numerous than
rolls. On the contents of the Jewish Canon, see Dictionary
of the Bible, “Canon.” B.F.W. “Josephus
enumerates 20 books ‘which are justly believed to be
divine.’” One of the earliest attempts by a Christian
to ascertain correctly the number and order of the Books of the O.T.
was made by Melito, Bishop of Sardis, who travelled for this purpose to
Palestine, in the latter part of the 2nd Century. His list is as
follows:—“Of Moses five (books); Genesis, Exodus, Numbers,
Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Jesus son of Nave, Judges, Ruth, four Books of
Kings, two of Chronicles, Psalms of David, Solomon’s Proverbs,
which is also called Wisdom, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job,
Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, the Twelve in one Book, Daniel, Ezekiel,
Esdras.” (Eusebius, H.E. III. cap. 10, note I, in
this series.) Cyril’s List agrees with that of Athanasius
(Festal Epistle, 373 a.d.), except that
Job is placed by Ath. after Canticles instead of before
Psalms.

751 Gr. ψευδεπίγραφα. For an account of the many Apocryphal Gospels, see the article
by Lipsius in the “Dictionary of Christian
Biography,” Smith and Wace, and the English translations in
Clark’s Ante-Nicene Library.

752 Cyril includes in
this list all the books which we receive, except the Apocalypse.
See Bishop Westcott’s Article “Canon,” in the
Dictionary of the Bible, and Origen’s Catalogue in Euseb.
Hist. vi. 25 (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol.
i.).

753 Compare xix. 8. where
all such acts of divination are said to be service of the devil.